Threatening letter from council

sevenhills

theartfullodger wrote: »

It's a free country, you don't have to open your mail. But you surely must have realised the consequences? Sounds to me like the Council are being entirely reasonable.

I would very much prefer my council/employer to contact me via email; but at the moment it seems like contact via snail mail is the legal/prefered option.

Shelldean

t0rt0ise wrote: »

The letters sent are a bit rude. I get them from a Housing Association who don't wait until an appointment has been missed but warn about taking to court and forcing entry in the first appointment letter, and in a very abrubt way. You have to assume that many people don't co-operate for them to behave like this. It's a shame that those of us who do read our letters and respond have to be spoken to in this way because others don't!

Jon8841.
Good job you don't live with in a property owned by either tOrtOise or my housing associations.

As tOrtOise says our first letter telling us of the first appointment warns us of the consequences of family to allow them to attend.

jon8871

This thread has actually cheered me up. Has just shown me how many small minded arrogant people there are out there, an I know I will not be like that.

EachPenny

sevenhills wrote: »

I would very much prefer my council/employer to contact me via email; but at the moment it seems like contact via snail mail is the legal/prefered option.

With most council 'enforcement' type stuff the notice is "deemed to be served" if placed into the mail. Depending on the nature of the 'enforcement' the legislation goes further and specifies the date on which the recipient is legally assumed to have received and read the notice (also depending on 1st or 2nd class post).

Therefore the council doesn't have to get into protracted discussions over whether or not an email was received and read... the law is clear, if the notice was sent to the address using the mail system then that is all the council needs to have done.

The additional cost of paper, envelopes, printing and stamps (vs email) is offset entirely by the saving in staff time in not having to argue the toss with residents who believe they have a right to be 'difficult'.

Therefore people ignore letters addressed to them or the occupier at their own risk... and ignoring letters from your landlord is a very big risk.

EachPenny

jon8871 wrote: »

This thread has actually cheered me up. Has just shown me how many small minded arrogant people there are out there, an I know I will not be like that.

The thing about "small minded arrogant people" is they are usually the last ones to realise they are small minded arrogant people.

Your appreciation for the help and advice given on this thread has been gratefully accepted. Hope it goes well tomorrow.

Rosemary7391

EachPenny wrote: »

With most council 'enforcement' type stuff the notice is "deemed to be served" if placed into the mail. Depending on the nature of the 'enforcement' the legislation goes further and specifies the date on which the recipient is legally assumed to have received and read the notice (also depending on 1st or 2nd class post).

Therefore the council doesn't have to get into protracted discussions over whether or not an email was received and read... the law is clear, if the notice was sent to the address using the mail system then that is all the council needs to have done.

The additional cost of paper, envelopes, printing and stamps (vs email) is offset entirely by the saving in staff time in not having to argue the toss with residents who believe they have a right to be 'difficult'.

Therefore people ignore letters addressed to them or the occupier at their own risk... and ignoring letters from your landlord is a very big risk.

I actually think it is probably saved in not having to maintain a proper email address database for every property, even before anyone has time to argue about it! It's nice to think that you just hand over your email address and that's that, but the number of people who either don't have email addresses or change them with every change of device... or their phone/whatever breaks and they don't get a new one until payday, spam filters sometimes filter out and delete important emails, some people use a relatives email address, some people share one, some people don't and the notification might need to be sent then to every resident?


Letters are *still* the standard for many things for a reason, and probably will be for quite some time...

theartfullodger

jon8871 wrote: »

This thread has actually cheered me up. Has just shown me how many small minded arrogant people there are out there, an I know I will not be like that.

Oh so (partly) true!

My sympathy for Dartford council's staff....

anselld

jon8871 wrote: »

Hi, it's council. There are no challenges, I just thought being threatened with eviction, fine, and a criminal record for not responding to a letter was a bit unreasonable and wanted to see what people here thought. Seems like most seem to think its pretty reasonable. The way people have gone on here is like I am some sort of criminal. Maybe I am the crazy one, or its just everyone else. I have no idea

Look, the Council threaten people all the time for all sorts of things. Round here we regularly get threatened with becoming criminals for not putting the bins out on time.

It seems to be just the way the bureaucrats like to deal with people. No amount of complaining will change their attitude so you might as well learn to rise above it.

EachPenny

anselld wrote: »

Look, the Council threaten people all the time for all sorts of things. Round here we regularly get threatened with becoming criminals for not putting the bins out on time.

It seems to be just the way the bureaucrats like to deal with people. No amount of complaining will change their attitude so you might as well learn to rise above it.

It isn't the way they like to deal with people, it is the way (unfortunately) that they have to deal with people because other ways simply don't work.

I'm surprised you get threats for not putting your bin out on time though - most councils adopt the policy that if your bin isn't out then it doesn't get collected, and in fact the council couldn't take legal action against you for not putting your bin out (on time) because you have no legal obligation to do so.

Not bringing your bin back onto your property (or the agreed location) by a certain time is something the council could take action over - and most people would agree it is appropriate for action to be taken if people have left their bin blocking the pavement until the day after the collection (or longer).

anselld

EachPenny wrote: »

It isn't the way they like to deal with people, it is the way (unfortunately) that they have to deal with people because other ways simply don't work.

I disagree. They send out a standard letter to everyone threatening them with criminal proceedings when the vast majority of people are happy to comply with simple instructions. That is their choice, their preference.

However, as I have advised the OP I am not going to have an argument about it.